Elevation Partners Had Other Offers for Bioware/Pandemic [Archive]

View Full Version : Elevation Partners Had Other Offers for Bioware/Pandemic

Apollwn

10-12-2007, 01:15 PM

According to next-gen.biz (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7515&Itemid=2):

"With an asset of this caliber, we were approached over time by a number of largely strategic investors to acquire the business--we never had the company up for sale and never have," said Elevation co-founder and managing director Bret Pearlman in a phone interview. "But all of the offers and approaches we had gotten over time weren't terribly interesting to us.

"When EA put forth the ultimate transaction price, which they never wavered from, we found it interesting and negotiated the transaction."

Having read this, I'm really puzzled as to how Bioware thought they were selling themselves into anything but a standard, short-term VC investment by selling out to Elevation. I thought it was about creative independence from the standard publisher relationships, and the quality of the games?

ÜberJumper

10-12-2007, 02:12 PM

Anything, anywhere, anytime is for sale if the price is right.

Itchyeyes

10-12-2007, 02:20 PM

Anything, anywhere, anytime is for sale if the price is right.
QFT
message too short etc

Micasa

10-12-2007, 02:20 PM

Itchyeyes

10-12-2007, 02:22 PM

Did elevation actually own Bioware and Pandemic outright? I find it hard to believe that at least some of the higher ups at those two companies didn't retain at least some stake in the company.

Edit: According to Wikipedia, Elevation Partners was not the holder of Bioware, that was VG Holding Corp. Elevation partners was just an investor in the Bioware Pandemic merger under VG Holding Corp. If that's true then execs at both Bioware and Pandemic would have probably retained some controlling interest in their companies and were probably wholly complicit in the sale to EA.

Doctorossi

10-12-2007, 02:49 PM

I love the language in this release!

Ubisoft: $$.

Elevation Partners: I do not find that... interesting.

Microsoft: $$$.

Elevation Partners: I do not find that... interesting.

EA: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Elevation Partners: Hmm... you make an... interesting point.

Apollwn

10-12-2007, 02:51 PM

I thought it was kind of funny that an EA guy quit, worked for Elevation until this got done, and then quit Elevation to go back to EA after they acquired the companies that - according to their own words - they'd had an eye on for some time.

It just reeks of a comic-book style setup.

Yes a mite suspicious, methinks. And yet we're supposed to believe this offer just happened along, while Elevation was minding its business.

Apollwn

10-12-2007, 03:00 PM

It seems that contrary the idea we got previously, Elevation had the controlling stake, having put up the lion's share of the dough. At least that's how it sounds now. In which case the VG Holding entity was just a convenient corporate container to lump Pandemic/Bioware together. I don't think the doctor's actually retained a controlling stake at all, just a profitable one. So either they ALREADY sold out, knowing that one day this could happen as soon as they built value in the company and Elevation found a buyer who would make them substantially more money than was invested, OR they were fooled into thinking the deal with Elevation was something more and other than it was. So which are they - great at investing (and selling out) or foolish at business?

According to Wikipedia, Elevation Partners was not the holder of Bioware, that was VG Holding Corp. Elevation partners was just an investor in the Bioware Pandemic merger under VG Holding Corp. If that's true then execs at both Bioware and Pandemic would have probably retained some controlling interest in their companies and were probably wholly complicit in the sale to EA.

Telefrog

10-12-2007, 03:06 PM

Protip: People in business lie.

tombofsoldier

10-12-2007, 03:08 PM

I guess Bioware will get what they deserve for selling out in the first place. Still sad though.

Darkman

10-12-2007, 03:16 PM

Its always about the money anymore at the owner level in any game company.

Deadend

10-12-2007, 03:19 PM

Protip: People in business lie.

No, they don't lie... they just don't tell the truth. There is a small legal difference, that means they don't get sued.

Apollwn

10-12-2007, 03:27 PM

The annoying thing to me is that it's not just bad for Bioware as a development culture in the long run (probably) and quite likely bad for the quality of games, but also a less profitable personal investment in the long run. I mean, if your company is worth hundreds of millions to someone else now, presumably that is because it will pay back that amount within a few years; at least, that's what EA claims. Wouldn't the doctors and other stock owners from within Bioware make a lot more money if they made like Bungie and invested in their future? Unless the doctors are finally getting tired of making games...?

Grifter

10-12-2007, 03:41 PM

snubber

10-12-2007, 03:46 PM

Protip: People in business lie.

Protip: the use of protip is already tired.

Mantooth

10-12-2007, 04:14 PM

Having read this, I'm really puzzled as to how Bioware thought they were selling themselves into anything but a standard, short-term VC investment by selling out to Elevation. I thought it was about creative independence from the standard publisher relationships, and the quality of the games?

I would be willing to bet that they knew exactly what they were doing and what would happen. Those press release comments when Elevation purchased them were the standard comments that you would expect. It is not like they would say in the press release, a private equity firm just purchased us and will be flipping us in a year or two to make some quick bucks.

It's all about the http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4761/moneyhatnd3.jpg

Skytram

10-12-2007, 04:21 PM

...or they love making games (money) so much and are so confidant in their skills to do so that they could make millions selling off Bioware, leave after a year or so to start up another company and do the same thing over again.

I'm sure that it's built into the deal that they and other key personnel at the developers will be required to stick around for a number of years.

Grifter

10-12-2007, 04:28 PM

I'm sure that it's built into the deal that they and other key personnel at the developers will be required to stick around for a number of years.

You're right, I am sure it's closer to five years, enough time to finish up everything they started before the buy out and still have time to run for cover before the shit hits the fan.

Xerxes

10-12-2007, 04:37 PM

Man... I wish MS really did get Capcom.

saran_js

10-12-2007, 05:18 PM

Man... I wish MS really did get Capcom.

Whatever the fuck for ?
If every single publisher were to buy up every independent developer, things would really suck.
Capcom is perfectly suited where they are now, catering to the whole industry, and not to one specific platform.
Get real.

[edit] Apart from that, I would believe that most of these guys are starting to dust off their resumes and updating it.

Dakar

10-12-2007, 05:40 PM

I'm sure that it's built into the deal that they and other key personnel at the developers will be required to stick around for a number of years.

There is no way to put in the deal that key developers won't be leaving. Only that the people signing the deal won't be leaving.

EvilTheBadger

10-12-2007, 06:56 PM

Man... I wish MS really did get Capcom.

Heh. Part of me wishes this story ends the same way that one did. Hahaha, you got us, guys! Nice work. Game's up! Alright, a joke is a joke.

Dammit.

silv

10-12-2007, 08:24 PM

MGS actually seems to be a pretty good place to be. Certainly better than EA.

51|RandoM

10-13-2007, 01:40 AM

Zeal

10-13-2007, 01:57 AM

Bioware didn't "sell out". Their parent company sold out and they had no choice but to go along.

DubiousQuality

10-13-2007, 05:24 AM

This is a sad day, imho. Bioware was founded on the principle of divorcing development from profit motive. They said, "We're going to make the game we want to make, the game we'd love to play, not the game guaranteed to sell X million units".

...and they may still have that mentality, but I have some severe reservations about their ability to maintain it in the face of publisher pressure from EA.

Valve, Blizzard, and Epic are the last holdouts in the pc development autonomy game. Give them your money whenever you can.

See I wouldn't even put Blizzard on that list since they basically churn out sequel after sequel, take longer than any dev to do it, and never push the envelop tech wise. Other than that I agree with you for once, and its truly sad to see one of the last great independant dev houses get swallowed up by EA. Hopefully Dragon Age still sees the light of day at some point. Was kinda looking forward to it.

JockoIsWacko

10-13-2007, 08:13 AM

THE EVIL EMPIRE WINS AGAIN....

and we all lose :mad:

Your Good Twin

10-13-2007, 10:05 AM

Valve, Blizzard, and Epic are the last holdouts in the pc development autonomy game. Give them your money whenever you can.

Bad thinking. Just because they are indie I'm not going to be more inclined to throw money at them. I vote on quality. Luckily, Valve, Blizzard, and Epic make copious AMOUNTS of quality, but if any start making middling crap, I'm not going to buy it just to show support.

jacktion

10-13-2007, 10:22 AM

A few interesting points have been brought up recently.
My take is that why do these developers always get acquired right when they are at their peak of power and money-making ability? First, Irrational Games who made Bioshock, got picked up right after they released Bioshock and were seemingly at the peak of their powers. Then they sell out? And now Bioware is about to release a huge game, Mass Effect, and now they sell out?
I don't understand. I always thought of selling out as something companies don't want to do unless they want out of the business. It seems like you don't control your destiny anymore and are making money for someone else instead of yourself.

And there are some successful companies that have avoided getting lumped in with any big evil masters. I think Valve would fall in that category? How about Doublefine Productions?
It seems that a super hot developer could stay independent and make money for itself and set up a deal with a publisher on a case by case basis to distribute games. Even if it is not in the publisher's best interests wouldn't they agree to get the business and money even if they can't own the company. I don't know.

Xerxes

10-13-2007, 11:08 AM

Bad thinking. Just because they are indie I'm not going to be more inclined to throw money at them. I vote on quality. Luckily, Valve, Blizzard, and Epic make copious AMOUNTS of quality, but if any start making middling crap, I'm not going to buy it just to show support.

I was joking about Capcom, but Epic would be a logical buy for MS. PC and XBOX seemed to be there staple anyways. But doubt it would happen.

Valve is owned buy rich guy who seemingly wants to make games on his own terms. No selling.

Blizzard made bajillion dollars off one game. No need to sell.

Epic has the hottest engine selling. No real reason to sell either. If they just wanted to have a publisher already there sure, but if they want one, they can get one.

Apollwn

10-13-2007, 11:36 AM

Bioware didn't "sell out". Their parent company sold out and they had no choice but to go along.

They didn't now, because they already sold out to their (ex-)parent company a couple years ago.

Apollwn

10-13-2007, 11:42 AM

I don't believe Blizzard can be considered indie, as I'm pretty sure they're owned by Vivendi. It's just that they get to do what they want, as only an idiot (EA?) would tamper with such a successful company.

Also, I'm pretty sure Irrational was already owned by 2K (Take 2) long before the recent name change. Their deal was probably necessary to get Bioshock made, much like it was necessary for Bungie to go with MS in order to have the funding to go on with Halo (or so I have heard).

BioGeorg

10-13-2007, 01:32 PM

Valve, Blizzard, and Epic are the last holdouts in the pc development autonomy game. Give them your money whenever you can.

Blizzard is 100% owned by Vivendy Universal.

Darkmatter

10-13-2007, 01:44 PM

Its to bad... Bioware has a reputation of being exceptionally good to their workers while EA has a rep of treating their people like garbage... I hope Bioware isn't now forced to follow EA's example of how to treat their people.

Pretzel

10-13-2007, 07:45 PM

Independent companies tend to sell out because they're deep in debt and constrained by publishing contracts. It's especially bad when you've got milestones to meet and the publisher keeps making changes to the game, yet still require you to make the original milestone schedule that was in the design document from before you started. And yes, publishers have been known to fuck with the design just to put the developer into a weeker position (hello Activision).

One thing that strikes me about this situation is that controversy with Mercenaries 2 showing the assassination of the Venezuelan President or something similar. I wonder if Bono (who's on the board at Elevation) suddenly realized that he was going to have bad PR for himself whenever they made a game that had controversy behind it. I think they just realized they really didn't have a taste for this business anymore.

PIPBoy3000

10-13-2007, 08:50 PM

Blizzard is 100% owned by Vivendy Universal.

Yep, and Valve is a publisher of sorts these days.

As an aside, I hope things go well for you and the other Bio folks, Georg. Corporate shuffling is always exciting, though hopefully it'll be business as usual for you folks.

Deadend

10-14-2007, 01:22 AM

DubiousQuality

10-14-2007, 02:57 AM

On the brightside of all of this... I think Obsidian is going to get bigger, as it may be the last of the unlocked RPG studios, of course, they got issues with deadlines and bugs. Still, I am sure a few BioWare people may be jumping ship in a few months.

I think Obsidian is getting better on managing time and resources though. Mask of the Betrayer does ALOT of things right, not only is it far and away more optimized but it also doesn't seem to have near the amount of bugs NWN2 had on ship. Also its pretty feature complete just being an expansion.

I don't think we'll see an effect on Bioware with this buyout til a couple years down the road. EA did keep Westwood, Origin and Bullfrog around for a few years before rebranding them as "EA <insert city name here>". not to mention company wide there appears to be a focus on changing for the better, rather than a flat out zero effort. Its a start at least.

BioGeorg

10-14-2007, 03:28 AM

Yep, and Valve is a publisher of sorts these days.

As an aside, I hope things go well for you and the other Bio folks, Georg. Corporate shuffling is always exciting, though hopefully it'll be business as usual for you folks.

We're fine - We just took over the worlds largest publisher, meaning we don't even have to worry about finding a publisher for our games anymore.

Seriously, we're doing just fine.

aries100

10-14-2007, 11:42 AM

We're fine - We just took over the worlds largest publisher, meaning we don't even have to worry about finding a publisher for our games anymore.

Seriously, we're doing just fine.

Yes, that could be one way of looking at it, I suppose :rolleyes: :cool:
However, I'm sure that EA want something in return for their over 800 million US $$$$$ that they've invested in Bioware/Pandemic Studios when they bought you guys from Elevation Partners.

To me, it just looks like a scam set up by EA to buy Bioware/Pandemic, since John Riccitielle left to the CEO of Elevation Partners that merged Bioware/Pandemic through a venture capital firm called VG Holdingh back in 2005. As I understand it, EA has had their eyes in Bioware/Pandemic for a really long time. And how else to do this but to send a envoy e.g. John R. to work with Ray&Greg of BIoware fame and then just make John R. CEO of EA so that Ray&Greg feel safe enough to hand over their own started firm, Bioware, to John Riccitiello and EA.

Ray&Greg has said in several interviews after this that John R. shares their values and that the Prez. of EA also does this and is a more serius gamers than they are. Well, that's all good and well, but EA is all about the money. Don't make the assumption that it isn't. If you doubt it, let me just point to EA spouse and her telling tale of her husband developer. Let me also point you to the Bioware devs. who left EA beacuse of the working conditions in EA. Do you really think that Bioware can get away with having the same working conditions as of today?? My own guess would be a big 'NO!' since EA of course want to impose the same working conditions everywhere in the corporation to make the cheapest games possible for the maximum profit possible. Such is the nature of EA's biznez.

It might well be that Ray&Greg and Bioware etc. are protected by John R. the first few years, but what happens when the beancounters at EA looks at Mass Effect or Dragon Age and says 'hey, these games are not selling in the 4-5 million range,' while FPS game XXXX is?? You do the math here. My guess is that John R. will be thrownout on the street so fast that he ddin't know what hit him and that Ray&Greg will be fired as CEOs at Bioware and if Bioware tries to break free, then EA will do an Origin on them e.g. shutting them instantly, since EA does NOT like any competition at all.

I can understand that you're worried about finding publishers for your gamers. I really don't se why? Bioware has a strong brand and should easily be able to get publishers for their games. This move then seems motivated out of fear, namely the fear of not being able to find a publisher for Bioware's games in the future. And as we well fear is the beginning of the the descent into the dark side :(

There have been much discussion of this both on the Bioware and the Pandemic boards and forums. People are worried, and I think, with good reason. I don't think Mass Effect or Dragon Age is in any danger though.
However, the CEO of EA, John Ritticiello did say that he wanted to see more Jade Empire games from Bioware. And when Gamespot mentioned this to good doctors they seemed a bit shaken & stirred at the same time, as they probably didn't had expected this to happen. But John R. in the end is the one that decided which games Bioware will be making. If he want Bioware to make Jade Empire 2-10, then it will be so for the next 8-10 years or so.

If we look at the sales of Bioware games, they are long-term sellers, not the required short-term sellers of today. And that's not about to change anytime soon, I don't think. Just to illustrate: Baldur's Gate sold 5 million games since 1998, that's about 550,000 units or copies pr. year. Now, EA wants Bioware to sell about 2 mill. units pr. games pr. year. I hope that Bioware is able to do this, but I doubt it.

/aries100

PIPBoy3000

10-14-2007, 11:43 AM

That's an interesting way of looking at it. :)

It also sounds like the status of Dragon Age is no longer "looking for a publisher". Neato.

Evil Avatar

10-14-2007, 03:58 PM

This is a sad day, imho. Bioware was founded on the principle of divorcing development from profit motive. They said, "We're going to make the game we want to make, the game we'd love to play, not the game guaranteed to sell X million units".

A few of us remember the last time Electronic Arts got their hands on a RPG developer. *cough* Origin Systems *cough*

Remember how astoundingly well that turned out.

BioGeorg

10-14-2007, 05:47 PM

This is a sad day, imho. Bioware was founded on the principle of divorcing development from profit motive. They said, "We're going to make the game we want to make, the game we'd love to play, not the game guaranteed to sell X million units".

Actually, I'm not sure where you get this information. In case it escaped you, the company was called BioWare Corp..

We always had a focus on quality and on making games that people want to play, because we believe that *profit* comes from customers who are satisfied with our products and want more of it - and we don't intend to change this and as far as I can tell, there are no plans to mess with this formula. You don't pay nearly a third of your available cash on hand on something that's profitable and change it radically.

Shocking, I know, but we never operated as a charity that makes games for fun only without thinking about what keeps us going - $$$. :)

tiremfej

10-14-2007, 06:28 PM

Actually, I'm not sure where you get this information. In case it escaped you, the company was called BioWare Corp..

We always had a focus on quality and on making games that people want to play, because we believe that *profit* comes from customers who are satisfied with our products and want more of it - and we don't intend to change this and as far as I can tell, there are no plans to mess with this formula. You don't pay nearly a third of your available cash on hand on something that's profitable and change it radically.

Shocking, I know, but we never operated as a charity that makes games for fun only without thinking about what keeps us going - $$$. :)

Whatever.

With EA, everything they have gotten their hands on has turned to garbage. I don't expect any less from you guys now. Please excuse my pessimism; It comes from years of watching it happen.

Bioware may have been great, but now you're just another company who now has to play by EA's rules. It didn't work out too well for Oddworld did it? Now you're going to be swallowed up by the mess of EA. Nice going. Way to give back to gamers, way to keep your scruples up.

Although, if I could make millions...I'd probably do the same thing...haha.

BioGeorg

10-14-2007, 07:11 PM

A few of us remember the last time Electronic Arts got their hands on a RPG developer. *cough* Origin Systems *cough*

Remember how astoundingly well that turned out.

I'm sure you're also aware that there is a rather complicated backstory to that whole thing. I agree that the result was very dissatisfactory (as a long time Ultima fan), but things are rarely as simple as they appear from the outside.

That said, EA a lot of interesting intellectual properties in their vault, some of them RPG related. Could be interesting in the long term...

Darkmatter

10-14-2007, 07:39 PM

So BioGeorg, do you think there will be any jobs lost at Bioware from this? Also, is there any concern about how people will be treated now that EA is around? EA doesn't exactly have a good reputation for treating their people well.

DubiousQuality

10-14-2007, 09:23 PM

Actually, I'm not sure where you get this information. In case it escaped you, the company was called BioWare Corp..

We always had a focus on quality and on making games that people want to play, because we believe that *profit* comes from customers who are satisfied with our products and want more of it - and we don't intend to change this and as far as I can tell, there are no plans to mess with this formula. You don't pay nearly a third of your available cash on hand on something that's profitable and change it radically.

Shocking, I know, but we never operated as a charity that makes games for fun only without thinking about what keeps us going - $$$. :)

With all due respect Georg, but I highly doubt EA will allow the same luxury of 5 year dev cycles like those of NWN1 and aparently Dragon Age, or extentions like Mass Effect got for a polish phase.

The influx of cash & resources may be great initially, but longterm I worry about the continued quality of Bioware titles with stricker deadlines and a more direct iron hand philosophy that EA seems to employ to ship a certain number of sku's per quarter.

BioGeorg

10-14-2007, 09:31 PM

With all due respect Georg, but I highly doubt EA will allow the same luxury of 5 year dev cycles like those of NWN1 and aparently Dragon Age, or extentions like Mass Effect got for a polish phase.

As always, things are not as simple as they appear. Ironically it was publisher problems that accounted for some of Neverwinter's rather long development time. At least we won't have to worry about that now, won't we?

Don't get me wrong, I can totally understand everyone's scepticism about the whole thing - I happen to be a long time gamer too. The only thing that we can do to convince people in this case is releasing awesome games, a bunch of them. Nothing more, nothing less. Until then, neither doomsaying nor preaching how great things will be will be helpful for anyone - just remember that things are rarely as one dimensional as the internet likes to present them :)

DubiousQuality

10-15-2007, 03:14 AM

As always, things are not as simple as they appear. Ironically it was publisher problems that accounted for some of Neverwinter's rather long development time. At least we won't have to worry about that now, won't we?

Don't get me wrong, I can totally understand everyone's scepticism about the whole thing - I happen to be a long time gamer too. The only thing that we can do to convince people in this case is releasing awesome games, a bunch of them. Nothing more, nothing less. Until then, neither doomsaying nor preaching how great things will be will be helpful for anyone - just remember that things are rarely as one dimensional as the internet likes to present them :)

True enough, and I did somewhat forget about the problems with Interplay at the time. I still am a tad worried about the fate of DA though. Being as we've had very little information since it was announced. I realize a huge focus was put on Mass Effect and the unannounced MMO the Austin team is working on, and that prolly meant DA got put on the back burner so to speak. I'm still very hopeful DA ends up being as great as NWN was, especially since you're not tied to having to impliment things the way Wizards of the Coast would require it not being a D&D licensed title.

Micasa

10-15-2007, 03:20 AM

A few of us remember the last time Electronic Arts got their hands on a RPG developer. *cough* Origin Systems *cough*

Remember how astoundingly well that turned out.

The really old ones also remember how EA started as Electronic Arts, devoted to making games they loved, being creative and not worrying about adhering to the 'must make huge bank' mindset.

That's the same company that's now simply EA, churning out at least a dozen sequels a year that offer marginal, at best, improvements over last year's version.

Darkmatter

10-15-2007, 10:17 AM

I guess my questions weren't approved for response. :)